The underlying math of 4e doesn't work well with PCs that are larger than size medium. After seeing what the CharOp people did with the Bugbear monster race (which isn't even large, it just has the Oversized trait), WotC has carefully avoided offering any way to play a size large PC, or even a PC that merely wields large weapons.
–
Oblivious SageJun 22 '12 at 22:38

I imagine you want to play a Giant for the extra die of damage. So be it. That's the primary advantage - but let's make it pretty much the only advantage, primarily offset by your size requirement: 2x2x2"

We've still got to fix the biggest balance problem raised by your size: Close Burst/Aura diameter

Suggested fix: Chose one of your current squares as the origin for the burst effect. Burst/Aura 1 will then only hit your 4 squares plus 5 more - not the usual 9. This specifically puts a cap on your number of adjacent enemies effected by powers like Defender Aura.

Space: .... Whenever the rider uses an effect that has an origin square (such as a melee, a ranged, a close, or an area power), the rider first picks where that square is located in the mount’s space, and the effect uses that origin square (the rider still shares the mount’s space for the purpose of triggering effects, such as opportunity attacks). For instance, if a Medium rider uses a close burst attack power, the rider chooses a single square within the mount’s space, and the burst emanates from that square.

In short, any diameter effect on one of your powers that would be increased as a result of your size, should be so modified. You lose 3 squares of effect in exchange for and extra damage die and other cool "I'm a Giant powers."

I'd like to expand this post with alternative design responses to any other critical concerns raised by the 4e players here. I'm thinking that homebrew is allowed here - not only official WotC cannon.
–
F. Randall FarmerJun 23 '12 at 17:19

1

Good solution on the burst/aura problem, it's similar to what you do with mounts so that's a great start. (pick an origin square on your mount)
–
wax eagle♦Jun 23 '12 at 17:32

1

The damage is still an issue, I think. Any race with a strength boost and the ability to use larger weapons makes a hideously effective ranger. Or any multi-attacker really, but rangers are the champions in that department.
–
Oblivious SageJun 23 '12 at 18:14

@ObliviousSage I'm cool with extra damage being the only real advantage. The general idea here is the negatives should equal out the extra damage. Any thoughts on other disadvantages? In the end, the DM always has to tune the encounters to match the party threat - so a few more monster hit-points or minions (wasting all the damage) and all is well again. wax eagle: Great catch - modified post to reflect.
–
F. Randall FarmerJun 23 '12 at 18:50

Well, the problem with limiting areas and bursts... is that the race just won't take them. As much as it's against the policy of 4e, I think the best bet here is to impose an accuracy penalty to counteract the large+reach weapon to provide "Average" damage. And under no circumstances grant threatening reach.
–
Brian Ballsun-StantonJun 23 '12 at 18:51